BMW M3 calls for 10w-60 - what to use?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
4,085
Location
Chicago, IL
I know Castrol has a 10w-60 TWS oil; and I know this was covered a month ago (so I will search) whats anyone running in M1 or Amsoil?
 
I just did an amsoil lookup on a 2008 M3 with the 4.0L engine, and there is no equivalent amsoil product for that engine.

Try this: http://www.amsoil.com/scripts/runisa.dll?amsoiloaf.587137158:RIGHTPANEL:856409547:M3,BW,N,852.

Mobil 1 I also did a lookup on their site and there is no recommended Mobil 1 product either.
 
If it's under warranty, used what's called for. If not, use it anyway.

They didn't spec 10w-60 for brown organic matter and giggles.
 
What a band-aid solution for a poorly designed, yet highly regarded engine. I guess it's easier for the proud german organization to recommend slack wax as a motor oil than it is to admit the problem and fix it for free. That said, the 10w60 is some serious stuff, you'd be chancing it with OTC oil.
 
Here's why I and my friends who drive BMWs that spec the 10w-60 are wary of alternatives:


- BMW's M division worked with Castrol to develop the engines and the oil together.

- BMW takes every opportunity to consolidate fluids across its models. They never use a different fluid for one of their cars unless it's necessary.

- We can be pretty sure this isn't a marketing thing to make the owners feel special, because the M division's turbo engines for the X5 M and X6 M do not specify the 10w-60. They run on the 5w-30 like almost every other BMW.

- Any time a manufacturer specifies something so unusual, and insists on it so adamantly for so long, it's worth listening.

- The Castrol 10w-60 in question may be one of the toughest street oils money can buy, period.


Now, this isn't to say there is definitely no alternative. Mobil insists their 0w-40 will do just fine, and given how cautious they are with what they say, I'm inclined to believe them. There are also a few alternatives in the thread below, although it is probably too soon to tell how those cars will hold up in the long run:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1570914

Bottom line: It's a gamble, and we don't even know enough to say how safe that gamble is. Unless you're particularly adventurous, I'd recommend sticking with BMW's recommended oil.
 
Originally Posted By: Max_Wander
What a band-aid solution for a poorly designed, yet highly regarded engine.

You're thinking of the S54 from the E46 M3, yes?

The failures were a result of manufacturing defects and a couple of design oversights. Those have long since been corrected.

That engine is now totally reliable. Despite being undersquare and producing over 100 hp/L, it will run at 8,000 RPM all day for years without even blinking. A friend of mine has over 100,000 miles on his, including several thousand track miles. The valvetrain looks like new, and so do his acceleration times. Not one drop of oil consumption, either.

(He uses the factory oil, by the way.
wink.gif
)
 
Yeah the S54 was an example of pushing the limits of displacement on the block. A good engine builder would hold the rod length as a very integral part of reliablity. It seems BMW tried to go the Honda route, very short rod (which helps excite movement at the intake port), combined with wild camming. It works, yes, but it's not too reliable. Even Honda has limits, which is why they overbored the H22 and cut the stroke comapred to the H23 (and applies to F22C as well).

Do you think BMW is just playing it safe with the S65 and the special 10w60 ester lube? Because I mean, you're totally right about the 10w60 being some hardcore stuff! Nothing on the shelf of WalMart can compare, really.
 
Originally Posted By: Max_Wander
Do you think BMW is just playing it safe with the S65 and the special 10w60 ester lube? Because I mean, you're totally right about the 10w60 being some hardcore stuff! Nothing on the shelf of WalMart can compare, really.

That's a good question.

In a way, all oil recommendations are "playing it safe" because you always want the largest operating margins possible. But what I think you mean to ask is, is it safe to assume that the engine doesn't actually need something that tough? That is certainly possible.

At the same time, I feel like it defeats the purpose of a BMW to push the limits of performance at the expense of safety/longevity. Plus, even with the 10w-60, the engine already has very little internal friction and highly efficient cooling. I don't think there is a lot to be gained by switching to a lighter oil, whereas there is certainly a lot to risk.
 
Hi,
tomcat27 - A previous Poster said this:
"The failures were a result of manufacturing defects and a couple of design oversights. Those have long since been corrected."

The faults were various and concerned the lubrication system to some degree. The 10W-60 lubricant was a quick "fix it" solution at the time

BMWs typically run with quite hot oil temperatures and I was always amazed at what they were in my Z3 2.8. In the M3 130C was quite common and a "cut off" point!

Mobil recommend M1 0W-40 or their semi-synthetic 10W-40 here in OZ and in New Zealand. Castrol recommend similar viscosities

You can safely use M1 TDT 5W-40 (Delvac 1 5W-40) or its new quivalent in NA

I used this lubricant in my Z3
 
Originally Posted By: d00df00d

- Any time a manufacturer specifies something so unusual, and insists on it so adamantly for so long, it's worth listening.


As an engineer, I can say that when a manufacturer try something like this, it is to hide a design defect that has no cost effective work around.

I don't think it is just the viscosity, but the additive package is also hacked to provide such a band-aid solution to the problem.
 
Fine. Let's grant that for the sake of argument. That's not exactly a good reason not to use the thing in question, is it?
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: d00df00d

- Any time a manufacturer specifies something so unusual, and insists on it so adamantly for so long, it's worth listening.


As an engineer, I can say that when a manufacturer try something like this, it is to hide a design defect that has no cost effective work around.

I don't think it is just the viscosity, but the additive package is also hacked to provide such a band-aid solution to the problem.


Sounds like a large assumption. Doug commented on the high oil temps in many BMWs. Maybe an 8,500rpm semi large displacement engine needs the HTHS. Remember, this thing is made to be run all out for hours on end without breaking.
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: d00df00d

- Any time a manufacturer specifies something so unusual, and insists on it so adamantly for so long, it's worth listening.


As an engineer, I can say that when a manufacturer try something like this, it is to hide a design defect that has no cost effective work around.

I don't think it is just the viscosity, but the additive package is also hacked to provide such a band-aid solution to the problem.


That comment may have had a lot of truth back when the S54 was first spinning rod bearings. Several years and generations of M engines down the road, I highly doubt the same "design defect" is still present with no workaround and simply being hidden by 10W60.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top